Bombay High Court quotes Lewis Carroll while granting relief to defunct textile mill

The Bombay High Court recently drew inspiration from a poem by author Lewis Caroll to pen a judgment granting relief to a textile mill [Glider Buildcon Realtors Pvt Ltd & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]..A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Kamal Khata was approached by a developer and a defunct cotton textile mill following a decision by the Maharashtra government to demolish the mill’s spindle unit..In its common judgment dated March 22, the High Court cited a verse from Lewis Carroll's poem, "The Walrus and the Carpenter.".The original poem featured a walrus, a carpenter and several naive, shoe-clad oysters. The poem described how a walrus and a carpenter called along oysters to accompany them on a walk, only for the oysters to eventually be eaten by the duplicitous duo. Before the untimely demise of the oysters, the poem features the walrus reciting the following verse:"The time has come,' the Walrus said, To talk of many things: Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax — Of cabbages — and kings — And why the sea is boiling hot — And whether pigs have wings.".This verse found mention in the High Court's March 22 decision, albeit in a paraphrased manner to suit the case at hand. “This is the story of a defunct cotton textile mill and its lands; of a city zoo expansion that never was; of a radical change in city planning; of spindles unlike any in children’s fairy tales; of the relentless pursuit of profits by a developer; and the fates and livelihoods of the textile mill’s erstwhile workmen and their families. Or, to badly paraphrase Lewis Carroll, the time has come (as the walrus might have said), to speak of many things: of mills and zoos and city plans, of workers and developer kings," stated the preface to the judgment published on April 1..These remarks were followed by a narration on the history of Bombay as a hub of cotton and textile trading. Such mills fell into decline over the years and what remained was the land that the mills occupied, the Court noted.The Court proceeded to note that the Development Control Regulations, 1991 (DCR) came about partly in view of the potential use of such lands for the development of the city.The textile mill in the present dispute claimed that a 2019 government decision to dispense with one such DCR was not correct. In focus was DCR 58, which dealt with the development or redevelopment of lands of cotton textile mills.It permitted the municipal commissioner to divide the land under mills into three parts: for cotton textile related purposes, for diversified industrial use with an industrial location policy and for commercial purposes.The said DCR, the Court noted, also took into account the need to make some provision for the housing and the livelihood of erstwhile mill workers.."Livelihoods cannot be sacrificed at the alter of Mammon".The textile mill in the present case, Mafatlal Industries, was declared a "sick" industry in the early 2000s. As part of a rehabilitation plan, Mafatlal was allowed to consolidate some of its activities and revive manufacturing activities by setting up a 10,000 spindle unit at Mazegaon.Mafatlal then entered into a development agreement with Glider Buildcon Realtors Pvt Ltd. As per the agreement, Gilder was to construct a 10,000-spindle unit and deliver it to Mafatlal. Gilder later wrote to the State suggesting that the spindle-unit's construction was unnecessary. In 2019, the Maharashtra government issued a letter stating that the requirement of the spindle unit need not be implemented since the mill workers had been paid. In view of this, it directed the demolition of the spinning unit.This decision was challenged before the High Court which eventually restrained the State from demolishing the spinning unit. .The Court reasoned that the profit making ambitions of real estate development companies cannot trump labour welfare provisions contained in DCR-58. Referring to the stance taken by Glider, the Court added,"Mumbai more than in any other city in India these social and economic disparities are already far too stark and far too much in conflict. These contradictions between extremes of poverty and wealth are literally smashed together here, cheek by jowl. We see daily how appalling these disparities are. We are being asked to add to these. We are being asked to do away with employment to erstwhile mill workers and their families. We are asked to hold that their livelihoods, earnings and the principled approach of DCR 58 must be sacrificed at the altar of Mammon.".The Court, thus, dismissed the petition filed by Glider in the matter, while allowing the petition filed by Mafatlal. .Senior advocates Rafique Dada and Ashish Kamat with advocates Aditya Mehta, Aakanksha Saxena, MS Federal, Murtaza Federal, Rashne Mulla-Feroze and Veer Ashar briefed by Federal & Company appeared for Mafatlal Industries.Senior advocate Virag Tulzapurkar and advocates Krishna Balaji Moorthy, Bhakti Mehta and Vikrant Baravkar briefed by Wadia Ghandy & Co appeared for Glider.Additional government pleaders Jyoti Chavan, Sheetal Malvankar and Pooja April appeared for the State.Senior advocates Mihir Desai with advocates Sanskruti Yagnik, Rishika Agarwal, Jane Cox and Rohini T appeared for the mill workers’ unions..[Read Judgment]